Skip to main content
Preview

Research from Friday’s close · next update overnight after Monday’s close

Radar
SLB

SLB Research brief

Schlumberger

Adjusted close as of 2026-10-30
$53.74(−0.13%)

Sagehood’s view on SLB

Schlumberger · Research 2026-10-30 · Accepted

Research score

54Neutral50 is balancedScore change +2 since 2026-10-29, from 52 to 54; view unchanged at Neutral. Compare the two recordsConfidence 55 · It is not a calibrated probability of investment success.Confidence across the 100 names in this research run: 45 to 70, median 55.
How to read this score

Dated research brief

WhySchlumberger reads neutral because price holds $52.52 support with a 40.9% annual channel slope while revenue grew 4.7% against a 13.4% sector median. The unresolved risk is the strong sector, with energy relative strength at +19.8 percentage points.
What argues against this viewThe strongest case against the neutral stance is the sector backdrop, which is unusually strong. Energy relative strength versus SPY is +19.8 percentage points with 100.0% of 8 peers above their 50-day average, so a laggard in a leading sector can still be carried higher.
Break conditionFrom the financial specialist: A later reading showing trailing-twelve-month revenue growth at or above the 13.4% sector revenue-growth median would break the weak-growth claim.Tests that specialist’s reading, not this page’s whole Neutral view.

Sagehood does not check this condition automatically. See research limitations below.

Valuation range

No model fair value for this run

Cash-flow model unavailable: the recorded cash, net debt are missing or invalid. Other valuation methods retain their own checks.

Peer-implied median $33.87 from 3 peer-median multiples.

Against peers

Energy
MultipleSLBGroup medianPercentile
P/E (TTM)26.09×14.16×100th
P/S2.21×2.51×33rd
P/B3.13×1.97×100th
FCF yield5.6%6.61%33rd
Score details & research limitations9 unavailable fields
Conditions Sagehood can check on its ownNot available in this run. A written break condition is not an automated check; this run does not provide a source-linked rule Sagehood can verify on its own.

Where the break condition comes from: Sagehood research took this condition from the financial specialist. It tests that specialist’s own reading, so it does not say everything that would change this page’s Neutral view.

How to read this research

The score expresses the published research view. 50 is balanced.

Bullish, Neutral or Bearish beside the score is the direction of that view, set by the research from the score: 65 and above is Bullish, 45 to 64 Neutral, 44 and below Bearish.

Confidence is how well the evidence supports this view, not which way it points: Sagehood research is asked to keep it no higher than its most confident specialist, and lower when the specialists disagree or much of the evidence is weak. It is not a calibrated probability of investment success.

Source verification checks the identity and origin of evidence. It does not prove that a claim is correct or that an investment will succeed.

Valuation estimates depend on their inputs and assumptions. They are not guaranteed future prices.

Retrospective research looks back at an earlier period. It is not a verified record of a decision made then using only information available then.

Unavailable is not zero. Read the adjacent reason: information may be missing, unverified or deliberately withheld.

How Sagehood works

The session this view is fixed to

Close$53.74 on 2026-10-30, as the research recorded it
Change on the day−0.13%
First eligible market session2026-11-02

Recorded score context

Specialist source coverage8 of 10 specialists have a verified source on this run. 2 do not.
Score reconciliationThe 8 specialist contributions shown add up to the weighted starting point this score was built from.
Change since the last accepted run52 on 2026-10-29 → 54 on 2026-10-30 (+2 points). This is simple arithmetic between the two published scores, not an explanation of the change.
The run this is compared withResearch of 2026-10-29

Not in this run: Run-specific score definition, Confidence band, Horizon, Why the score changed, Today's unexplained move and Blockers.

What this was built from

Filing cited in the evidenceNot recorded on this card. The newest filing on record is under Key financials, and recent filings are listed under SEC filings.
Peer set6 names in Energy: CVX, DVN, EQT, HAL, KMI, OXY. How they were chosen is under “Valuation & peers”. The valuation range shows the peer-implied median from 3 peer-median multiples.

Not in this run: Company profile date and Standing disclosure.

Not available in this run

9 fields are unavailable. Each is identified with its reason above; missing information is not zero or a negative research signal.

Price context

· adjusted close $53.74

+13.9% from 2026-06-25

Recent price-basis check: 2026-10-02 to 2026-10-30 (20 sessions). Economic comparability outside this window remains unchecked.

SLB adjusted close
Adjusted price · USD · viewing 2026-06-25 to 2026-10-30

Selected 2026-10-30. SLB adjusted close. Continuous series. $53.74 US dollars.

90 daily adjusted-price observations through 2026-10-30, ending at the 2026-10-30 research date. The final point is a dated final close. Shown for context, not point-in-time research evidence: the research used the prices recorded with it.

Use the arrow keys on the chart to step through observations.

Published score history

2026-07-23 to 2026-10-30 · 37 publications

Each point is a verified published score. The line breaks where the research method changed (4 methods, numbered in the order they were first used), so scores are not joined across methods. Hollow points were published after their decision window (retrospective).

Every published score and confidence
Research dateScoreViewConfidenceMethod
2026-10-3054Neutral55Method 4
2026-10-2952Neutral50Method 4
2026-10-2852Neutral55Method 4
2026-10-2752Neutral50Method 4
2026-10-2650Neutral50Method 4
2026-10-2351Neutral55Method 4
2026-10-2247Neutral45Method 4
2026-10-2145Neutral50Method 4
2026-10-1645Neutral50Method 4
2026-10-0947Neutral49Method 4
2026-10-0744Bearish45Method 4
2026-10-0245Neutral50Method 4
2026-10-0144Bearish60Method 4
2026-09-3050Neutral52Method 4
2026-09-2951Neutral55Method 4
2026-09-2851Neutral55Method 4
2026-09-2551Neutral50Method 4
2026-09-24 · retrospective51Neutral52Method 4
2026-09-2351Neutral60Method 4
2026-09-1852Neutral65Method 4
2026-09-16 · retrospective50Neutral55Method 4
2026-09-09 · retrospective51Neutral60Method 4
2026-09-0462Neutral65Method 4
2026-09-01 · retrospective52Neutral60Method 4
2026-08-31 · retrospective57Neutral61Method 3
2026-08-2855Neutral61Method 3
2026-08-26 · retrospective54Neutral61Method 3
2026-08-24 · retrospective53Neutral61Method 3
2026-08-20 · retrospective54Neutral60Method 3
2026-08-19 · retrospective54Neutral60Method 3
2026-08-1454Neutral60Method 2
2026-08-1354Neutral63Method 1
2026-08-0754Neutral63Method 1
2026-08-0654Neutral63Method 1
2026-08-0454Neutral63Method 1
2026-07-3149Neutral83Method 1
2026-07-2347Neutral54Method 1

Specialists

8 of 10 published specialist analyses are available.

Each specialist’s view is shown as the published research recorded it; supporting detail appears only when it was recorded with that same view.

2 unavailable

SLB research

Financial specialist

Showing Financial specialist result.

Financial specialist

Evaluated for this session

Bearish

Schlumberger grows slower than its energy peers at 4.7% trailing-twelve-month revenue growth versus the 13.4% sector revenue-growth median, though $4,558 million of trailing-twelve-month free cash flow and 1.47 conversion remain solid.

Full analyst note

What the specialist sees

Evidence: trailing-twelve-month revenue of $36,887 million grew 4.7% year over year, below the 13.4% sector revenue-growth median, while trailing-twelve-month free cash flow was $4,558 million and free cash flow conversion was 1.47 versus the 1.3 sector free cash flow conversion median.

Why it matters now

Slow top-line growth relative to energy peers, combined with a falling equity trend and a 9.8% year-over-year share increase, suggests the business is not compounding per-share value as fast as its peer group.

What could change the view

Countercase: A rebound in the next quarterly revenue growth above 4.7% or a return of operating margin to the 31.7% sector operating-margin median would undercut the weak-growth read, and the missing operating margin and cash balance leave the balance-sheet picture uncertain. Falsifier: A later reading showing trailing-twelve-month revenue growth at or above the 13.4% sector revenue-growth median would break the weak-growth claim.

Specialist score details
Specialist score
44
Evidence confidence
70
Base weight for this role
0.13
Base weight × confidence
9.10
Weight in the score (the chip's weight)
0.18
Weighted contribution
8.03
Business driver
Trailing-twelve-month revenue of $36,887 million grew 4.7% year over year, below the 13.4% sector revenue-growth median, while trailing-twelve-month free cash flow was $4,558 million and free cash flow conversion was 1.47 versus the 1.3 sector free cash flow conversion median.
Mechanism
Slow top-line growth relative to energy peers, combined with a falling equity trend and a 9.8% year-over-year share increase, suggests the business is not compounding per-share value as fast as its peer group.
Countercase
A rebound in the next quarterly revenue growth above 4.7% or a return of operating margin to the 31.7% sector operating-margin median would undercut the weak-growth read, and the missing operating margin and cash balance leave the balance-sheet picture uncertain.
Contributions & coverage details

Specialist contributions

Each specialist’s recorded numbers, in the usual specialist order, as recorded: nothing is re-ranked or recalculated. Weights and contributions show two decimals; hover for the exact value.

Financial specialist

Bearish

Score
44
Evidence confidence
70
Weight in the score
0.18
Weighted contribution
8.03

Risk specialist

Neutral

Score
48
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.09
Weighted contribution
4.24

Sector specialist

Bearish

Score
42
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.11
Weighted contribution
4.63

SEC filings specialist

Neutral

Score
52
Evidence confidence
62
Weight in the score
0.04
Weighted contribution
1.94

News specialist

Neutral

Score
58
Evidence confidence
58
Weight in the score
0.13
Weighted contribution
7.42

Price-trend specialist

Bullish

Score
68
Evidence confidence
65
Weight in the score
0.26
Weighted contribution
17.74

Valuation specialist

Neutral

Score
50
Evidence confidence
30
Weight in the score
0.10
Weighted contribution
4.82

Economy specialist

Neutral

Score
50
Evidence confidence
60
Weight in the score
0.10
Weighted contribution
4.82

Published specialist analyses unavailable: Geopolitics specialist, Social-media specialist. No specialist result is inferred.

  • Geopolitics specialist: This specialist had no checked public source on this run, so no source-backed analysis is shown.
  • Social-media specialist: This specialist had no checked public source on this run, so no source-backed analysis is shown.

How this insight was formed

Each specialist view shown here is checked against the published research files. Sagehood research combined those views into the one Research Score above.

Evidence & method

Inspect the reasoning, source records and valuation behind this dated view.

Sagehood research reasoningSpecialist reasoning, selected statements and filing context
Accepted publication2026-10-30 researchNext eligible session 2026-11-02point-in-time

SLB: Sagehood research reasoning

Accepted research score

54

Neutral50 is balanced
Lead specialist in the research decision:

Financial specialist

Bearish

Specialist score 44Evidence confidence 70
What the specialist sees

Trailing-twelve-month revenue of $36,887 million grew 4.7% year over year, below the 13.4% sector revenue-growth median, while trailing-twelve-month free cash flow was $4,558 million and free cash flow conversion was 1.47 versus the 1.3 sector free cash flow conversion median.

Why it matters

Slow top-line growth relative to energy peers, combined with a falling equity trend and a 9.8% year-over-year share increase, suggests the business is not compounding per-share value as fast as its peer group.

What argues against it

A rebound in the next quarterly revenue growth above 4.7% or a return of operating margin to the 31.7% sector operating-margin median would undercut the weak-growth read, and the missing operating margin and cash balance leave the balance-sheet picture uncertain.

This specialist’s break condition: A later reading showing trailing-twelve-month revenue growth at or above the 13.4% sector revenue-growth median would break the weak-growth claim.

How the score was formed

The specialists’ weighted starting point was 53.64. Sagehood research’s adjustment was +0.36. 52 on 2026-10-29 → 54 on 2026-10-30 (+2 points). This is simple arithmetic between the two published scores, not an explanation of the change.

Evidence Sagehood research weighed

These selected claims are evidence Sagehood research weighed, not a reconstruction of the numeric adjustment.

Claims as this research published them. Sagehood confirms each claim and its support were published together with this research. That is not an independent check, and it does not prove the claim is accurate or predict future performance.

  1. Financial specialist

    Same statement as under “What the specialist sees” above.

  2. Price-trend specialist

    SLB closed at 53.74 on 2026-10-30, above the 52.52 support with 3 touches and the 51.71 support with 3 touches, with a 1-year channel slope of 40.9% per year and a 90-day slope of 31.8% per year.

  3. News specialist

    The 2026-10-23 Barrons.com earnings item drew a one-day return relative to SPY of 7.61 and three-session return after the news of 9.14, while the 2026-10-27 MT Newswires analyst-rating item drew 1.32 and 1.38.

Sagehood research decision

The investment case, main risk and break condition are the ones shown under Sagehood’s view at the top of this page.

Recorded break condition
Break condition as kept in the decision trail

A later reading showing TTM revenue growth at or above the 13.4% sector revenue-growth median would break the weak-growth claim.

Evidence & sourcesClaim-support availability, filing-context links and research method

SLB: This run has no checked links from its claims to their evidence. The specialists’ writing is shown as recorded, and no missing evidence is filled in.

Research evidence at a glance

Accepted specialist evidence · no score adjustment

Key figures

Fundamentals

Trailing-twelve-month revenue of $36,887 million grew 4.7% year over year, below the 13.4% sector revenue-growth median, while trailing-twelve-month free cash flow was $4,558 million and free cash flow conversion was 1.47 versus the 1.3 sector free cash flow conversion median.

Valuation model

The valuation grid is absent for SLB, and the peer-implied median of $33.87 rests on 3 implied prices, 37.0% below the $53.74 close, while trailing-twelve-month revenue of $36,887 million rose 4.7% and FCF conversion reached 147.2%.

Potential upside

  • No DCF or EPS grid was computed for SLB, so no base fair value is available; the peer-implied median of $33.87 sits 37.0% below the $53.74 close on 3 implied prices. Trailing-twelve-month revenue of $36,887 million grew 4.7% and FCF conversion was 147.2%, but the read stays neutral.

Potential downside

  • Schlumberger grows slower than its energy peers at 4.7% trailing-twelve-month revenue growth versus the 13.4% sector revenue-growth median, though $4,558 million of trailing-twelve-month free cash flow and 1.47 conversion remain solid.

Questions to watch

  • A later reading showing trailing-twelve-month revenue growth at or above the 13.4% sector revenue-growth median would break the weak-growth claim.

  • A later reading of the peer-implied median below the $53.74 close would keep the rich read intact, while a median above that close would break it.

Accepted research

Research dated 2026-10-30.

How this research was made

This research is AI-generated and is not investment advice.

Research date
2026-10-30
Valuation & peersInput limits notedFair-value cells, peer multiples and the inputs behind the range

Cash-flow model unavailable

Against the 2026-10-30 close of $53.74 (recorded)

Fundamentals reference date: 2026-09-30.

Cash-flow model unavailable: the recorded cash, net debt are missing or invalid. Other valuation methods retain their own checks.

Implied by the median of 3 peer-median multiples: $33.87 (−37% vs close)

Peers: the 6 Liquid 100 names in Energy that this run priced. Companies outside the Liquid 100 are not in the set.

The names: CVX, DVN, EQT, HAL, KMI, OXY.

Multiples against the peer group

Energy · 6 companies in the group

  • Price to earnings (trailing twelve months)26.09×

    Peer median 14.16× · middle half 11.79× to 19.48× · 100th percentile of the group

  • Price to sales2.21×

    Peer median 2.51× · middle half 1.79× to 3.49× · 33rd percentile of the group

  • Price to book3.13×

    Peer median 1.97× · middle half 1.41× to 2.44× · 100th percentile of the group

  • Free cash flow yield5.6%

    Peer median 6.61% · middle half 5.4% to 10.04% · 33rd percentile of the group

This run declares Enterprise value to EBITDA and computes no value for it, for this company or for its peer group.

Evidence limits: 16 valuation inputs required conservative handling: another valuation input required conservative handling; no full-year gross-profit line was filed; no full-year operating income was filed; depreciation and amortization were available but not used because this version does not compute an EV/EBITDA multiple; debt coverage was incomplete.

Includes the currently displayed specialist or comparison, not every specialist. Dates and limitations remain attached.

Sagehood research is for general information. It is not individualized investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security.

Schlumberger (SLB) research | Sagehood